spoils sport

Thankfully never had that issue but i never bet doubles or trebles. What a joke an absolute joke these bookmakers are nothing but money collectors. Huddy you must have done well in that shop before?

Where exactly was this shop?

Max stake via website zero.
On the phone they will sometimes lay me a tenner e/w, normally a fiver e/w.
Will not accomodate any further money, even at SP. Traders decision.

Paddies ain't much better....

it was the shop at the start of grafton street,and i say the  last time i was in there was over a year ago so that of that what you want,

Are you omitting the fact that the races were at 5:50, 7:50 and 9:20 and were all trained by the same individual?

ye thats right,they were the horses i was trying to bet,

and all trained by noel quinlan??

ye that correct,

Those horses were being punted in cross doubles and trebles all day as far as I know.

No surprise you were turned down and it might have been an idea to mention that in the first place.

Whether they should have taken the bet is another matter but would you expect to get that bet on if it was 3 Barney Curley horses?

How did you know that Distant View? You obviously work there? It is still a pretty pathetic reason if you ask me for that amount.

maybe so well how was it that paddies took the bet no bother,done the bet in their branch on lemon st,stil not to get a penny on is a joke,they must be the worse with prices on alot of fancy horse when you check their prices compared to other firms,say i would of got a bet on no bother with their roulette machine

Pretty much anyone that was watching racing today knew about those horses or at least should have known if they are following markets and listening to what is going on. The opening poster was obviously tipped off on these as well.

I have no connection with the firm in question and it is not a pathetic reason to refuse the bet.

I assume you are aware of how the stable has performed this year?

your correct i was sent a text to back the 3 of them alrighti was working alday so didnt see any racing during the day,

They pulled off a big double at Lingfield or Kempton a couple of months back from what I remember.

It's pathetic DV, if it was a valid reason Powers would have refused it as well. Another shocker from Spoils.

By the way what was so special about these horses? And the stable's form this year?

was that the 1 when barris dennis went to moan to the officals after the 2 horses won?

Yes Giant Strides.

I would suggest that they could fall within the definition of related bets and therefore it is understandable that bookmakers would be cautious when bets on the yard are being placed.



Quinlan-trained trio well supported at Kempton

By Paul Eacott 5:19PM 27 APR 2011 BOOKMAKERS took a punishment from a Quinlan-inspired gamble at Lingfield earlier in the year and three runners in the care of trainer Noel and brother Mick have come in for significant support at Kempton this evening.


RELATED LINKS
Kempton cards
Free bets 
In the first race at 5.50pm Kanace was having a first start for the trainer having previously been in the care of Jeff Pearce. The four-year-old returned at 9-2 having been 11-2, but could only finish second behind Hecton Lad.

At 5.30pm Clear Sailing, in the 7.50, was as short as 9-1 having been a general 25-1 chance this morning. In the last race at 9.20pm, Holcombe Boy was as short as 7-1 from 33-1, although he was still available at much bigger prices.   

I think that would be a good interpretation of that bet at a run of the mill meeting DV. Whether or not it`s fair is another matter.

well my friend got the same bet on with a local indo do bother,and the prices were alittle bit better aswell,

Distant View..What you decribe is not a related bet,a related bet is a double Frankel to win Guineas and Derby because if he wins Guineas his price for Derby contracts.

strictly talking its not a related bet but i think its a fair assumption to make that if the first one(bsp6)had won,the other 2 's sp's wud not hav been 30 and 36 and wud have performed a bit better than last and third last.

I said it could fall within the definition.

I am well aware of what a related bet is, in the most normal circumstances.

My point is that if a few horses are known to be non-jiggers in previous races and are lined up to run on the same day and are then the subject of strong support, then a bookmaker can quite easily term this a related bet. There is a strong possibility that both will leave their previous form behind as part of a plan to land a gamble and the performance of the first horse could then determine the performance of the stablemate.

In most cases, this would not be something that would concern a bookmaker and trainers such as Cecil, Nicholls, Hendersen etc can have a number of winners on the same card and it would not be an issue, or an unusual event. However when a trainer has demonstarted in the past that this type of plot forms part of his modus operandi, then I would term it a related bet and therefore one that a bookmaker is entitled to treat with caution.

As it strictly does not fall within the term as we would know it (although I have never looked up T&C on this), then obviously a bookmaker could not void the bet if it was taken, as he could do with say Hooper to score first goal and Celtic to win in a straight double. However they certainly could refuse to lay the bet and I see know reason to criticise this practice. It may well make the game a bit straighter if these attempted coups prove to be a futile exercise.

After the two Barney's trebles(Curley & O'hare) trading rooms look for trainers with more then two horses and suspicous betting patterens and shut up shop straight away. Can't blame them unless the said same people are renowned for backing the same horses everytime they run...Then the joes aint playing ball.

I hav'nt had a bet with spoils since my €3 EW L15 was refused about a year ago. I found the staff ok to deal with over the years but I got the impression they were almost afraid of the trading room people and as a result they were verifying bets that strictly speaking did'nt need to be verified. What used to annoy me was the way you were left standing at the counter, like a spare part while the cashier had a long conversation with the trading room about whether to accept the bet or not. On one occasion the cashier apologisied to me  after he told me he could'n accept the bet(only €50 ew) and remarked to me that the only question the trading guy had'nt asked him was what colour underware I was wearing.

Wildman is right, there is no way in the world this is a related bet end of story. I thinkit's quite straight forward actually, these things fail a lot more than they succeed anyway. With the exception of Curley i would lay a treble on any other trainers horses.

Distant View..Why not just cut the prices that would seem reasonable to me.The presumption is that they had taken plenty of bets on this treble so as these prices are not guaranteed just shorten them.

Problem is these traders in the trading rooms were never out on the battlefield. None of them ever stood on a pitch and took a bet. They are college boys whom are like del boys. Like to be clever or smart but in reality they are just filofax weilding saddos who would sh!t themselves if you took them to the races. The traders ruined the names of our bookmakers in Ireland.

Rocketfingers Joined: 20 May 10
Replies: 1584 28 Apr 11 00:02   


Wildman is right, there is no way in the world this is a related bet end of story. I thinkit's quite straight forward actually, these things fail a lot more than they succeed anyway. With the exception of Curley i would lay a treble on any other trainers horses.

Luminaries such as the O'Hares & the Wlesh "Taffia" await your bookmaking licence application with bated-breath.

I'd have no problem accepting bets from you steering, considering you did not know the champions chase was run over 2 miles

p.s. Learn to spell [;)]

steeringjobnap Joined: 20 Oct 10
Replies: 578 07 Mar 11 15:37   


In Norn's absence:-

Arguably the most difficult CH to solve since Istrabraq first went to post in this race [he had been as big as 14/1 the previous winter].

At the head of the market is reigning champion, Binocular. He is a horse that has flattered to deceive at Cheltenham - imperious last year in this race, he struggled with the white-hot pace set by Celestial Halo the prior year [was 3rd]; while was beaten on his 2008 visit by Captain Cee Bee.

Neither have won at the Festival since 2008.

Last year's runner-up Kyber Kim was already an 8 y.o. [& he's had a horrible year since winning the Aintree Hurdle last April]; The 3rd; the 4th & the 5th [Zaynar, Celestial & Starluck] have not won a hurdling race since; the 6th [Solowhit] has spent an Irish winter "looking up the arse of Hurricane Fly" [to quote Davy Russell] as he has chased that particular contender home 4 times in Grade 1s.

Ten of the last 15 winners were also aged either 6 or 7; and the form set by last year's star novice Menorah franks the claims of Dunguib, Mille Chief & Oscar Whiskey.

I wouldn't touch Binocular with stolen money at his current price; and will be a layer.

looks like quinlan's going for a punt today  3.00 donc - peadar miguel  6.4